Jump to content

New York (again)


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

The study shows spikes in areas with windmills. I attached the study earlier and quoted some of it. Why would you reply if you had no idea what was in it? It is like you are proud of your ignorance.

It says those are just reported and not confirmed and no case study to match or do a baseline. 
 

Trump was just completely bullish itting. Are you saying he was truthful? 
 

You actually believe him that windmills are causing cancer? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Timmys article: 

 

This report is not intended to critically review the literature on wind turbines and health, as such reviews are available.[3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10] The purpose of this report is to quantitatively assess the potential for possible diagnoses through the application of the proposed criteria. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

It says those are just reported and not confirmed and no case study to match or do a baseline. 
 

Trump was just completely bullish itting. Are you saying he was truthful? 
 

You actually believe him that windmills are causing cancer? 

So you believe the NIH created a report for Trump years before he was president just to give him cover? That has to be your rationale to call him a liar. You are truly just a political hack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

So you believe the NIH created a report for Trump years before he was president just to give him cover? That has to be your rationale to call him a liar. You are truly just a political hack.

I don’t believe anything you people say at all. This report does not back upTrumps lies 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I don’t believe anything you people say at all. This report does not back upTrumps lies 

Yes facts and logic are difficult to accept when you are a political hack. I love your believe that NIH created a study that acknowledges the spike in cancer around windmills before Trump was president in order to give him cover.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Yes facts and logic are difficult to accept when you are a political hack. I love your believe that NIH created a study that acknowledges the spike in cancer around windmills before Trump was president in order to give him cover.

They did no such thing. LOL, try and tell the truth, will you? 

But you were probably told that is what the study says and did not read it yourself 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

They did no such thing. LOL, try and tell the truth, will you? 

But you were probably told that is what the study says and did not read it yourself 

You wrote "It says those are just reported and not confirmed and no case study to match or do a baseline". It does not prove causality but it shows an increase of reported cancer, perhaps read what YOU wrote.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

You wrote "It says those are just reported and not confirmed and no case study to match or do a baseline". It does not prove causality but it shows an increase of reported cancer, perhaps read what YOU wrote.

 

 

You don't even understand what you are posting. That report says that people are claiming they have symptoms but that doesn't even mean thy are sick. This is what happens when people try and prove Trump said something truthful. they end up looking stupid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You don't even understand what you are posting. That report says that people are claiming they have symptoms but that doesn't even mean thy are sick. This is what happens when people try and prove Trump said something truthful. they end up looking stupid. 

The report does not debunk they are sick, they have simply not confirmed it for that report. I will ask two questions to you- what does this study prove? And why was it started? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

The report does not debunk they are sick, they have simply not confirmed it for that report. I will ask two questions to you- what does this study prove? And why was it started? 

What does the American Cancer Society say? Hint, that Trump is lying 

 

The study you sited proves nothing

I have no idea 

 

 

You think Trump is honest, right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

 

 

 

 

Paterson: Cuomo's 14-day transition is 'suspicious'

 

 

By SHANNON YOUNG

 

08/12/2021 11:39 AM EDT

ALBANY — Former New York Gov. David Paterson raised questions Thursday about why Gov. Andrew Cuomo is taking 14 days to officially leave office following his resignation announcement. 

Paterson, a former lieutenant governor who ascended to New York’s top office after Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned amid his own sex scandal, told WNYC’s The Brian Lehrer Show that the two-week window before Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul can take over seems dubious.


https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2021/08/12/paterson-cuomos-14-day-transition-is-suspicious-1389850

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

PPP lib response: "Yeah, but the difference is the democrats punish their own"

 

 

LOL

 

 

CUOMO COMEBACK BEGINS: Looks like the Democratic National Committee’s fund-raising arm is helping the soon-to-be-former New York chief executive pay off debts and start a stash for future opportunities.

 

 

https://freebeacon.com/elections/democratic-national-committees-top-data-firm-stands-by-cuomo/

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RiotAct said:

I was just coming here to post this.

 

Glad to see we have new blood in office. Perhaps female perspective will help her out state leadership back on track. 
 

That said….we’re to believe the Lt Governor had zero knowledge of her boss sexually harassing employees, and was totally, completely in the dark on the COVID death count?  No one warned her, no one raised red flags, she wasn’t interested in looking into the numbers occurring on her watch?   
 

Sure. 
 

Meet the new boss, likely same as the old boss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I was just coming here to post this.

 

Glad to see we have new blood in office. Perhaps female perspective will help her out state leadership back on track. 
 

That said….we’re to believe the Lt Governor had zero knowledge of her boss sexually harassing employees, and was totally, completely in the dark on the COVID death count?  No one warned her, no one raised red flags, she wasn’t interested in looking into the numbers occurring on her watch?   
 

Sure. 
 

Meet the new boss, likely same as the old boss. 

Just playing devil's advocate- maybe she assisted in getting him ousted because of his actions. I have no inside information but I want to give her a fair shot 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I was just coming here to post this.

 

Glad to see we have new blood in office. Perhaps female perspective will help her out state leadership back on track. 
 

That said….we’re to believe the Lt Governor had zero knowledge of her boss sexually harassing employees, and was totally, completely in the dark on the COVID death count?  No one warned her, no one raised red flags, she wasn’t interested in looking into the numbers occurring on her watch?   
 

Sure. 
 

Meet the new boss, likely same as the old boss. 

 

 

I'm sure they didn't communicate often.  She isn't his type. Who wants a buzzkill at the conference table?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

 

I'm sure they didn't communicate often.  She isn't his type. Who wants a buzzkill at the conference table?

 

 

 

The information I’m thinking she was read in on would not come from him.  I can’t imagine her being clueless as for they types of things that brought him down—too many voices with too many ambitious people, and he’s too big a target. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Just playing devil's advocate- maybe she assisted in getting him ousted because of his actions. I have no inside information but I want to give her a fair shot 

Maybe, but she’s been lt gov since 2015. If she didn’t know, she was blissfully ignorant.  
 

Btw, on the Today show right after Cuomo announced his resignation, Savannah Guthrie quizzed her on what she knew and how she might have missed it.  Hochul’s response was I’m essence “I travel a lot”.   It would have been nice to see her pressed on that. 
 

This is politics and my only point is that it would be virtually impossible for her not to be read in on information this potentially damaging to her.  No idea the numbers were being cooked?  No idea Cuomo groped female staffers?  
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Nah.  Don't overreact.  New York and California are simply dying and no longer relevant.  California losing house seats for first time ever.  New York has the same population it had in 1970.

 

You leave.  Unfortunately, many vote the same way.  That has to stop.  

 

Because these policies will follow them.  See Virginia.  

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...